M2 to M3
Is that a hidden octave between soprano and base or not?
Fragment from book Korsakov.
Kind regards,
Hidden octaves or not?
-
- KVRAF
- 15279 posts since 8 Mar, 2005 from Utrecht, Holland
How come you're in doubt?
What's the definition of a "hidden octave" in your text book?
Does that definition fit here, or not? Why?
What's the definition of a "hidden octave" in your text book?
Does that definition fit here, or not? Why?
We are the KVR collective. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. 
My MusicCalc is served over https!!
My MusicCalc is served over https!!
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 71 posts since 10 Apr, 2006 from Belgium
Hello,
It's from a harmony book from D. Korsakov.
As he is no beginner I do not understand why it is notated as a model in that book.
See screenshot pg 12 down under.
It's from a harmony book from D. Korsakov.
As he is no beginner I do not understand why it is notated as a model in that book.
See screenshot pg 12 down under.
-
gaggle of hermits gaggle of hermits https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=521655
- KVRian
- 963 posts since 18 Jul, 2021
a hidden octave is similar motion and is in the outer voices, so, technically yes.
but Rimsky was a romantic-period composer and this is a chapter on harmonising a melody by the looks of it so those rules are not strictly applied. the soprano in the model, I assume, is following a melodic shape and it happens to be the root in m3, so the bass is going to be the root as well in most cases. with root doubling, hidden octaves are practically guaranteed unless you're going to contort yourself into all manner of shapes to avoid it. as there's a whole lot of similar motion going on from m2 to m3, perhaps it's not the greatest model ever in this particular translation (and I'm not sure whether this is Rimsky or Fischer's addition in this case) but as it's not 16th century plainsong not all that many people care.
this is the problem with applying rules from traditional theory: the theory changes as you get closer to the 21st century.
but Rimsky was a romantic-period composer and this is a chapter on harmonising a melody by the looks of it so those rules are not strictly applied. the soprano in the model, I assume, is following a melodic shape and it happens to be the root in m3, so the bass is going to be the root as well in most cases. with root doubling, hidden octaves are practically guaranteed unless you're going to contort yourself into all manner of shapes to avoid it. as there's a whole lot of similar motion going on from m2 to m3, perhaps it's not the greatest model ever in this particular translation (and I'm not sure whether this is Rimsky or Fischer's addition in this case) but as it's not 16th century plainsong not all that many people care.
this is the problem with applying rules from traditional theory: the theory changes as you get closer to the 21st century.
-
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
It is. A rule of thumb here is avoid when it's the outer voices in 4 parts. Some course or even schools will be stricter on the principle than others, but outer voices is generally considered not merely a minor rule or what-not violated but shabby part-writing. It's aka an exposed octave; the prominence as "exposed" kind of leads the ear to the same effect as a parallel octave.
It's kind of a canard to point to the fact of Rimsky being a 'late romantic'. Unless there is some desirability (which is certainly not noted in that depiction from a book) of the effect (cf., parallels, esp. parallel fifths, deliberately done to impart an archaic style or mood) exposed [hidden] octaves in 4 parts is frowned upon for the student for good reason. With that looking like a textbook...
So, as there is no indication the material is meant to be something different than classic harmony handling it looks a bit bizarre to see it there.
(I never consulted Rimsky on basic handling of harrmony; I had the famous orchestration... pamphlet but it didn't help me much. Great composer, a groundbreaker in some ways, anyway.)
I instantly noticed the hidden fifth at the same juncture and that's if anything worse to me.
(I would be amiss to neglect to note that there is a type of 'hidden fifth' that can be quite unavoidable (a 'German sixth' to V7 resolution), known as "Mozart Fifths" actually, which JS Bach also did all the time. I remember this tidbit because I will have otherwise got 100% on my theory final at CCM. Some schools stricter than others
.)
It's kind of a canard to point to the fact of Rimsky being a 'late romantic'. Unless there is some desirability (which is certainly not noted in that depiction from a book) of the effect (cf., parallels, esp. parallel fifths, deliberately done to impart an archaic style or mood) exposed [hidden] octaves in 4 parts is frowned upon for the student for good reason. With that looking like a textbook...
So, as there is no indication the material is meant to be something different than classic harmony handling it looks a bit bizarre to see it there.
(I never consulted Rimsky on basic handling of harrmony; I had the famous orchestration... pamphlet but it didn't help me much. Great composer, a groundbreaker in some ways, anyway.)
I instantly noticed the hidden fifth at the same juncture and that's if anything worse to me.
(I would be amiss to neglect to note that there is a type of 'hidden fifth' that can be quite unavoidable (a 'German sixth' to V7 resolution), known as "Mozart Fifths" actually, which JS Bach also did all the time. I remember this tidbit because I will have otherwise got 100% on my theory final at CCM. Some schools stricter than others
.)
